BTW, here's the drop-kick call from the playbook.
It doesn't even involve the CB on play side (Jackson).
It simply states that when this call is made (automatically or as the safety calls out, we don't know), the safety comes down on the crossing route and the off-side CB (Quin) takes his place deep.

It clearly says CORNER in the POST.

So if a player, corner or safety does not run the play correctly shouldn't head coach have player and DB coach heiney for some chewing?

__________________
I want to be able to recognize the difference between a "want" and a "need" and then I want to be satisfied with getting a need

BTW, here's the drop-kick call from the playbook.
It doesn't even involve the CB on play side (Jackson).
It simply states that when this call is made (automatically or as the safety calls out, we don't know), the safety comes down on the crossing route and the off-side CB (Quin) takes his place deep.

It clearly says CORNER in the POST.

Looking again at this play it shows a CB and FS covering two WRs. Maybe I am missing something as I am tired and my air conditioner quit working in my apartment, but where is the other corner and the SS? I want my CBs to stick with the WRs and FS and SS to back them up not replace them on a play.

__________________
I want to be able to recognize the difference between a "want" and a "need" and then I want to be satisfied with getting a need

Maybe I am missing something as I am tired and my air conditioner quit working in my apartment, but where is the other corner and the SS? I want my CBs to stick with the WRs and FS and SS to back them up not replace them on a play.

I don't believe any team plays strict man coverage 100% of the time. You've got 11 defenders on the field, why not use them all. Especially if you consider the defense is at a disadvantage not knowing exactly what the offense is going to do on a given play, zone coverages make more sense.

This particular defense would be called when the offense is playing two tightends on a run down. They should run, it looks like they are going to run, you load the box.........

Schaub has been in the top 10 in completion % since he joined the Texans. If he has accuracy issues, who doesn't? And how can you get confirmation on a few plays out of nearly 600? Not that I'm challenging 76Texan to post screen shots of every play from 2010. Please don't. I'm just saying...

I'm not going to derail this thread, but if you think comp% determines an accurate passer, you need to watch the game different. Carr his last year was at about 70% or so, but that doesn't mean he's accurate. Accuracy is hittting guys in stride down the field. How many top 10 qbs would've made walters or aj stop and wait on the ball after beating the cb by 5 or 6 yds. This is the nfl and those are poorly thrown just in the clips. I watched shcaub leave tds on the field because of a non accurate throw. Had a top qb made those throws, 6 would be on the board.

I'm not going to derail this thread, but if you think comp% determines an accurate passer, you need to watch the game different. Carr his last year was at about 70% or so, but that doesn't mean he's accurate. Accuracy is hittting guys in stride down the field. How many top 10 qbs would've made walters or aj stop and wait on the ball after beating the cb by 5 or 6 yds. This is the nfl and those are poorly thrown just in the clips. I watched shcaub leave tds on the field because of a non accurate throw. Had a top qb made those throws, 6 would be on the board.

That's a part of accuracy.

Another part of accuracy is choosing the right guy to hit, and then getting the ball to him so that he doesn't get killed. Schaub is usually pretty good at getting the ball to the right guy and not hanging him out to dry.

Looking again at this play it shows a CB and FS covering two WRs. Maybe I am missing something as I am tired and my air conditioner quit working in my apartment, but where is the other corner and the SS? I want my CBs to stick with the WRs and FS and SS to back them up not replace them on a play.

That is why I said it doesn't even emphasize the on-side CB (Jackson).

If you look back at all the examples I gave concerning the 2-man route, the SS comes down to play the run.

The defense usually shows the QB quite clearly that they are in cover one/cover 3 type.

The 2-man route is designed to beat cover one, especially cover 3.
It is designed to "play" the FS.
The basic concept is that the offense floods the FS middle zone with 2 receivers: one high (the deep route) and one low (the crossing route).
If the FS stays up top to cover deep, the QB hits the crosser.
If the FS comes down, the QB goes long.

The drop-kick call was designed to combat this 2-man route.
It brings the FS down to take the crosser while the off-side CB goes into the deep middle to look to intercept the ball.
This is designed to bait the QB to make the deep throw.

The on-side CB was not shonw, becasue he simply plays his normal assignemnt in cover 3. He takes care of the usual 1/3. He watches for the outside receiver to cut to the corner or to the outside (back shoulder fade) or turn back on a stop/come backer route. He also serves to back up the FS on the crossing route.

I certainly don't mind it at all.
A good friend of mine of some 30 years still butt-head with me about KJax.
He's too busy to watch all of these evidence even though I am willing to sit down and go over all 16 games with him.
He said (like Rey said) that he didn't need to rewath anything, that he believe his own eyes.

I still see him pretty much every week.

Hahaha. I've been pretty much on your side with this thread. I think the entire secondary had issues last season and I won't lay 6-10 at the feet of KJ. I'm hoping 2011 shows the big jump in performance for him that it usually does for players. Of course, with the lock out all that might go out the window, too.

The one thing with KJ that still bother me is the well documented problem of slipping/falling down and the damning comments Phillips made about him. I guess only time will tell how good of a player he ends up. He has 2 more years in my book before I label him a bust.

__________________
"We cannot order men see the truth or prohibit them from indulging in error."

That wasn't the point. We aren't trying to compare the Texans pass defense with the Raiders or KJac with Aso.

What 76 is illustrating is that the receiver has the edge, always in one on one coverage. The corner has no idea when the ball is going to release, or where the receiver is trying to get to. The defensive scheme dictates how the corner is going to play a particular route on a particular down. Expecting safety help inside, you have to honor the outside route, where there is no help. When you do that, the receiver gets natural separation if they cut back inside. Which is ok, because there is supposed to be a safety there. If the safety isn't there, the easy (and wrong call) would be to blame the CB for being a talentless clueless P.O.S. even though he did exactly what he was supposed to.

We know it is exactly what he was supposed to do, because that is exactly what pro-bowl corners (& the Colts corner) did.

Unless you are saying each one of those corners in the exact same situation played that situation wrong. If that is your argument, all 76 is asking, is to tell him when & where you saw it done right. A picture or video would be nice... but no one is taking him up on that one.

Ummmm as many raider screen shots as i've seen i have to differ. Plus look 2 posts below the original one posted above.

Comment from Solomon Wilcott on the Floyd play:
"Namdi must be saying what happens to the help I wa expecting from the other side of the field?.... Misread and mistake in the secondary will cost you every single time."

Seems like a lot of comparing to me.

K. Jac and Aso are WORLDS apart. I consider K. Jac a minor league player compared to Aso. Cause thats how Jackson plays.

Taking this thread to it's logical conclusion, do you think signing Weddle would be a bigger payoff for the Texans than signing Aso? Of course signing both would be the ultimate payoff bt highly unlikely.

__________________
"We cannot order men see the truth or prohibit them from indulging in error."

Taking this thread to it's logical conclusion, do you think signing Weddle would be a bigger payoff for the Texans than signing Aso? Of course signing both would be the ultimate payoff bt highly unlikely.

Personally, I'm more worried about who we sign for Safety than who we sign for Corner. That's the position that's going to make or break our secondary. We can't go into a season with:

<FA CB> - Quin - Keo/Nolan - KJ/Harris

That's just not going to work.

I'm starting to really like the idea of Goldson but I'd prefer Weddle.

Taking this thread to it's logical conclusion, do you think signing Weddle would be a bigger payoff for the Texans than signing Aso? Of course signing both would be the ultimate payoff bt highly unlikely.

My theory, in the past, QBs have had easy throws to make. They haven't been having to make tight throws, or difficult throws. They haven't had to wait for receivers to clear LBs, or receivers running into safeties. They haven't had to wait that fraction of a second, because all their lanes were open.

I don't believe any team plays strict man coverage 100% of the time. You've got 11 defenders on the field, why not use them all. Especially if you consider the defense is at a disadvantage not knowing exactly what the offense is going to do on a given play, zone coverages make more sense.

This particular defense would be called when the offense is playing two tightends on a run down. They should run, it looks like they are going to run, you load the box.........

If you are saying the circles I thought were receivers are actually TEs.. maybe. But nothing indicates that. If it is two WRs, I want corners on them; SS and LBs should cover TEs leaving a FS to back up the play.

__________________
I want to be able to recognize the difference between a "want" and a "need" and then I want to be satisfied with getting a need

That is why I said it doesn't even emphasize the on-side CB (Jackson).

If you look back at all the examples I gave concerning the 2-man route, the SS comes down to play the run.

The defense usually shows the QB quite clearly that they are in cover one/cover 3 type.

The 2-man route is designed to beat cover one, especially cover 3.
It is designed to "play" the FS.
The basic concept is that the offense floods the FS middle zone with 2 receivers: one high (the deep route) and one low (the crossing route).
If the FS stays up top to cover deep, the QB hits the crosser.
If the FS comes down, the QB goes long.

The drop-kick call was designed to combat this 2-man route.
It brings the FS down to take the crosser while the off-side CB goes into the deep middle to look to intercept the ball.
This is designed to bait the QB to make the deep throw.

The on-side CB was not shonw, becasue he simply plays his normal assignemnt in cover 3. He takes care of the usual 1/3. He watches for the outside receiver to cut to the corner or to the outside (back shoulder fade) or turn back on a stop/come backer route. He also serves to back up the FS on the crossing route.

And this is why we had problems as our CBs could not run with many WRs and had to have safety help but did not many times. If our CBs could run with WRs, the QB could not successfully choose where to throw regardless of the FS. If we have Aso and my draft pick Brandon Harris @ corners with Quin helping out Harris ALWAYS, then QB has to hope ASO slips or WR just beats him.

__________________
I want to be able to recognize the difference between a "want" and a "need" and then I want to be satisfied with getting a need

And this is why we had problems as our CBs could not run with many WRs and had to have safety help but did not many times. If our CBs could run with WRs, the QB could not successfully choose where to throw regardless of the FS. If we have Aso and my draft pick Brandon Harris @ corners with Quin helping out Harris ALWAYS, then QB has to hope ASO slips or WR just beats him.

but we just saw pictures of Walter running away for corners & Aso getting beat.... it's not about talent level, or ability to run with receivers.

My theory, in the past, QBs have had easy throws to make. They haven't been having to make tight throws, or difficult throws. They haven't had to wait for receivers to clear LBs, or receivers running into safeties. They haven't had to wait that fraction of a second, because all their lanes were open.

That would be great if we had any LB's that were good in coverage. I'm with you and a few others as far as being concerned with our LB corps. I don't count on Ryans coming back anywhere near 100% his pre-injury self or count on him for any extended length of time. So with whom and how is Wade going to improve that aspect of coverage? Do you think Sharpton will be that much improved in his sophomor season? He showed nice flashes last season.

__________________
"We cannot order men see the truth or prohibit them from indulging in error."

Collingsworth's comments on Wade's coverage:
"One of the tough part about playing the Cowboys is that very seldom you have one-on-one coverage. It's like they switch coverages where it looks like you'd be running around on one guy and they release you to the next guy and they end up doubling somebody else so you never feel totally comfortable as a QB when you're throwing the ball because you don't know who's going be the guy who's guarding who."

This refers to disguise and pattern matching.
There would be a LB (whether OLB or ILB) guarding the hole or help double teaming a receiver or a TE. They try to take away the throw to the middle part of the field (mainly). That helps the CBs and safeties by lessening their burden on slants and crossing routes. (Not always, but definitely more help than the Texans LBs ever help out on these routes.)

Sure, what corner can not be beaten or what WR can not have a great play? Tongue in cheek or not you know you agree with me.

Yeah, difference between goodness and greatness in sprots is pretty narrow. A batter in baseball only needs 2 hits per week to go from .250 to .300. A Wr needs only 1.5 catches to go from boring 65 catch guy to 90 catch pro-bowler. It may take a lot for players to make those handful of plays over the next guy, but barring the silly extremes of awful and elite, figuring out how not to let Steve Smith pass interfere or not making that slight slip on a break is a two play difference in being pretty versus not good. It is that close.

__________________It doesn't just seem like I was talking down to people, I was. (Runner 8/4/09).